John Carmack reveals that AMD can match Nvidia in hardware but loses out when it comes to drivers.
Well,its the truth Nvidia has better driver support.
I think having to deal with drivers should be a publisher issue, but its only the consumer that gets the shaft cause people still buy the games whether they work or not. Driver issues are the reason why I hate not gaming on proprietary hardware.
^^^Aka stealth console fanboy. Games work just fine on pc, it was a good attempt sir, but it's way too obvious you don't even own a pc.
@DA_Shredder "Driver issues are the reason why I hate not gaming on proprietary hardware." Lol so what do you do when games like Mafia 2 (missing foilage), BF3 (input lag), Skyrim (poor fps) get released on propriatary hardware? At least on the PC when the dev ditches you the fan base comes out with fixes, no such thing on console complately at the mercy of the developer also lets not pretend consoles dont have driver updates (its just called firmware, anyone remember the recent PS3s getting bricked).
Havent bought AMD hardware since 5000 series. I personally like to use hardware in multi gpu configurations. AMD hardware just has too much microstrutter in crossfire. Also while AMD provides all right support for current hardware, they tend to ignore previous generations. For example i could load up a 8800GTX today and it will run games fine, try doing that with an AMD 4870 and things just wont go as smooth.
I could load up a 8800GTX today and it will run games fine, try doing that with an AMD 4870 and things just wont go as smooth. Wwwooooooo. Slow down there decrypted my old pc is running a E6600 co locked with a sapphire 4870 hd radon is doing just fine and plays a whole libary of games. Sure crisis 3 BF3 take a hit so lower your settings. Yes micro stutter continues to persist with crossfire than Nvidia but the drivers do sort that out if you wait. Oh and mr carmack your games always been driver certified Nvidia by your devs not AMD first. Now dont get me wrong ive been gamer for generations consoles to computers from voodoo to ati to Nvidia i can tell you ive not had issues with AMD drivers and up untill my GTX560 kfa2 i never had driver issues with Nvidia till had driver not responding TDR. Somert moderators hate hearing about on fourum. Now this could been due to the kfa2 cards i had 2 both sli and single. But right now im runnin back with AMD with 7970 im happy. Disagree or agree doesnt bother me cos im happy
@hiredhelp Yeah Nvidia drivers for my GTX 670 was pretty damn crappy for a long time. New games come out, I can't play it without using Beta drivers, installed Beta drivers BSODS. This went on for months, finally 314.XX came out and 320.XX and no more drivers issues. Posted my driver issues on a couple of websites for help, I got attacked. Fanboys called me an AMD fanboy like I have $400 plus to waste on a video card just to talk crap about it. The time I wasted on forum websites was the usual replies, dude its your power supply (1000 watts), its your overclock (default), its your CPU, its your memory. Sent the card in to Gigabyte and they flat out told me it was Nvidia drivers. Now I never had any driver issues on AMD hardware and I've own about 7 of their cards compared to NVidia's 5. Of the 5 Nvidia cards I've own 4 didn't last a year, never had an AMD fail on me.
@hollabox. Right i know you do get attacked i hated that they first want to know your setup tryin to find fault your side.. Crazy anyways glad they've sorted you out pal im also happy to see someone else whos been happy AMD cards too.
@hiredhelp Yeah I don't get it, Nvidia fanboys always scream bad drivers AMD, micro stuttering. Google search Gefore GTX 670 drivers issues, its allot, google search Nvidia drivers making video cards fail, if you want some old driver issues, good search driver problems with the Gefore 6600 GT (Black Bars). On top of that the following Gefore cards died on me; Geforce MX2,4400 TI, 6600 GT, and Gefore 460 in 9 months or less. I like to upgrade about every 15 months for my GPUs and every 2.5 years for my CPUs. I've had the following AMD 6970, 4870, 3800, 1800XT, X800, 9700 non pro, and ATI 9000. None of them failed on me. Even my old 9700 was still running in my moms computer until 2008. My old ATI 4870 is still running on my brother in law computer, so yeah AMD cards from my experience seem last awhile. Only reason why I upgrade so frequently because I like to play at 60 FPS or better, and keep up with the latest Direct X versions. My GTX 670 was every bit or faster than AMD 7970 at that time, plus I wanted to experience PhysX to see what the fuss was about, big mistake so far.
@hollabox. Glad to see im not alone btw i love the end sentence there you made my day. " plus I wanted to experience PhysX to see what the fuss was about, big mistake so far."
From my experience, Carmack is 100% on the money AMD drivers suck compared to Nvidia.
Hopefully, with next-gen consoles, game developers will be working closer with AMD to ensure their drivers are up to scratch.
"REVEALS"? The world already knew this.
do consoles use the same drivers as the PC? I thought consoles used customized drivers just like the PS3 uses customized APIs.
They are not the same as their PC counterparts and any updates are done by MS/Sony.
Even then, the firmware updates are not driver updates, you cannot update the GPU in consoles. If you get screen tearing or any other annoying issue with graphics, you'll have to live with. Take skyrim for the ps3, that game was crap but if that issue was on pc, you can rectify most of the issues with a good driver update on the graphics card. Of course the lack of ram on the ps3 was also an issue, it could have helped.
I never said firmware updates are driver updates, and the reason Sony and Microsoft can't just update drivers on a monthly basis is that they have to worry about compatibility with previous titles. AMD and Nvidia might not give a shit if they break a graphical effect in a game that is 3 years old, but Sony and Microsoft do. Plus on consoles they don't use the bloated APIs we have on PCs anyway so it's not like driver updates would improve performance anyway.
once you get mainstream parts, you will need a bit modified drivers, however i dont imagine sony or MSFT dealing themselves with the burden of develloping video drivers themselves. Microsoft on the other hand owns a very powerfull Library called directx, and video card manufacturers need to stick close to it, i am on nvidia`s side with an sli 680 and i believe it will do fine for the next 5/6 years cheers
Nvidia and AMD have same hardware but AMD is cheaper. Nvidia has better drivers but because AMD is in next-gen consoles games will be optimized for AMD right off the bat. Nvidia will have to release drivers to compete. I see a market shift approaching.
No, because Nvidia has always been better at releasing drivers in a timely fashion. As of right now, I see no reason to go reason to switch to AMD. Nvidia has been pretty good to me for about a decade, so unless they screw up I'll stick with them.
AMD release drivers monthly, I update every now and then, maybe its running a single GPU but I have never had a driver problem. Ive played near every major release over the last ten years. AMD have always given better value (UK) and great overclocking. Until nvidia gets their frames per £ ratio down ill stick with the red camp.
Somebody help a layperson out. I thought that with consoles the individual game developers are free to code directly to the hardware even in binary if they want to. Wouldn't they all be free to write their own drivers for their particular games? Where would these "superior drivers" that Carmack is talking about come from? Would they come from the hardware maker, like Intel, Nvidia, and AMD, or is there sort of a middle-ware industry that supports Nvidia better than it supports AMD?
Sshhh people don't want to hear that. It goes against their argument.
Its the hardware guys that do it. They test new games on the hardware and if anything needs fixing they fix it, otherwise their periodic updates will have performance increases. Nvidia has, for many years, been better at driver support for their hardware. That's the simplest answer for the second part of your question, I'll leave it to someone smarter to elaborate/provide a better answer for the first part.
I am an nvidia fan but amd is getting my attention with those bundles. Even so, I don't give two poops in regards to whatever this guy has to say. He lost my respect.
How is AMD hardware just as good as Nvidia's? AMD has nothing that comes close to the performance of a 780 or Titan. Yes, they released the 7990, but you can't even compare because that's a dual GPU card. I tried using multi gpu setups, and finally after being frustrated for years I gave up. Multi GPU setups are just way too much of a hassle, and they have so many drawbacks, like microstutter (AMD is far worse than Nvidia) and heat (my two 580's could heat up my entire downstairs), that make it just not worth it by any means. So what is a single GPU AMD card that has similar performance to a GTX 780 or Titan? Also, I used to be an AMD fan because I always thought you got more for your money. That's just not the case. If you look at benchmarks, the 670 is similar in performance to a 7970 (with the 670 actually a little more powerful). The 670 is CHEAPER than the 7970, although not by much. If you just look at newegg the cheapest 7970 is $380 and the cheapest 670 is $350. If anything, on average across all 670/7970 cards they're about equal in price. Or compare a 660 to a 7850. Not to mention AMD's cpu's blow for gaming. Yes, I refused to admit for a while after buying an 8150, but I eventually came to my better senses and switched to intel. An i5 3570k gets significantly smoother and higher performance than an 8150. I also tried an 8350 and performance wasn't much better. The way I see it is AMD is heavily invested right now in consoles, so their PC components fell behind a little. I'm sure a short while after the next consoles come out AMD will be releasing some great hardware. I also imagine AMD's driver problems will be much less significant once the new consoles come out. The guy that wrote this article is an idiot. I don't know if he's getting paid by AMD or what, but it's just mind blowing how much false information is out there about various aspects of the gaming industry.
No clock for clock the 7970 was better than the 680 let alone the 670. At the beginning of the 7000 series release the card were clock at much lower speeds than their nvidia 600 series so there were performance differences unless you overclocked them. Amd even claimed back the fastest single gpu card with the release of the 7970 ghz edition until nvidia release the titan.
Just look at the benchmarks... http://www.videocardbenchma...
@Bobbo44 I have seen many more that have 7970 beating the 680 in games not just one benchmark. LinusTechTips and techtomorrow have tons of benches showing the differences. Hell techtomorrow shows the 7970 faring much better against the 780 than the 680. Like I stated clock at the same or similar speed the amd cards perform the same or better especially at higher resolution.
Think it depends on what cards and what games. I have a 680gtx in one pc. and a ati 6870 in another. Both with a 2500k processor @ 4.5ghz. In BF3 with most maxed at 1080p, the 6870 is either just under 60fps or on the smaller maps easily over it. I also ran CRYSIS3 just under maxed on the 6870 as well and it did a great job. There are some settings at max where you see 2% visual gain but it takes like 10-20fps,lol. Alot of the time it just isn't worth it.
And unfortunately for AMD/ATI, Software drives hardware...
Am I the only one who has zero issues with amd drivers?
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.